Tuning Protocol

CHAPTER 2

Stage 2: Pitch the Proposal

If it seems as if it’s taken an awfully long time to get to stage 2, that’s not an illusion. A lot of heavy lifting has already taken place and important work carried out. Since the initiative hasn’t already been abandoned, it means it has legs, and the leadership team leader is ready to commit it to paper.

Proposal development can be done in narrative style, slideshow presentation format, or a combination of the two. One way to think of the pitch is as storytelling. The first part of the plot lays down the basic foundation for the idea itself, followed by how the idea (or story) unfolds, and then the ways in which the idea resolves a central problem or conflict. The beginning should hook the audience, the middle should explain the problem that the idea will address, and the conclusion should wrap up the narrative with a recommendation. This chapter introduces you to a calibration tool called a tuning protocol for the leadership team to utilize during the team leader’s first formal presentation on the topic, as well as a diagnostic notetaking form that will result in uncovering the gaps and opportunities ahead.

TUNING PROTOCOL

There is a wide variety of approaches for using protocols in professional settings to vet new initiatives. McDonald and colleagues (2013) write:

The protocols have been adapted countless times in many settings for diverse purposes. They are popular too because each implicitly teaches one of three but rare important skills: the first, how to give and receive safe and honest feedback; the second, how to analyze complex problems carefully and without rushing to judgment; and the third, how to ground interpretations of complex texts. (p. 1)

There are a host of methods to choose from, all with the same goal of helping the leadership team get in tune with the rest of the school or district.

The primary objective of the tuning protocol is to obtain feedback from colleagues about the degree to which a proposal is ready. The tuning protocol in figure 2.1 delineates the roles, responsibilities, and participation guidelines for the participants in the exercise. Using this structured discussion tool, the leadership team leader delivers a presentation for colleagues who serve as critical friends. They are there to compassionately and honestly offer feedback to improve the leader’s proposal. They are also there to support the team leader by looking for gaps, presenting alternatives, providing distinct lenses, and helping the leader craft the plan. Some of these individuals will serve in this sole capacity as initial thought partners and not end up participating on the forthcoming leadership team, while others will continue along the journey. I refer to this vetting body as the consulting team.

Tuning Protocol

When you tune a plan, you have two basic components: a set of goals and a set of activities sequenced in a way to help your group meet those goals. The objective is to get feedback from colleagues about the degree to which the activities seem likely to help the group achieve these goals. The plan is in tune when the goals and activities are in alignment. This is also critical for your new initiative to move into the implementation stage.

Presentation to Address These Issues (fifteen minutes)

… Description of initiative … Why you are bringing forward the initiative … How the initiative aligns with existing district frameworks, initiatives, and mission and vision

… The data driving this need … The intended impact on teaching and learning … How you will measure that impact … The anticipated timeline from conception to full launch … Resources needed (personnel, training, materials, technology, time) … Stakeholder engagement … Regular communications

Clarifying Questions (three minutes)

… Clarifying questions pertain to matters that can be answered factually or in a few short words. Save substantive issues for later. … The protocol facilitator, not the team leader, is responsible for making sure that clarifying questions are really clarifying.

Individual Feedback (two minutes)

… Participants write down warm and cool feedback to share in the whole- group discussion. … They can phrase warm feedback as “I like . . .” or “I appreciate . . .” to show favorable reactions. … They can phrase cool feedback as “I wonder . . .” or “You may consider . . .” to prompt further thinking and discussion.

Group Feedback (fifteen minutes)

… Participants talk to each other about the presenter’s plan (as if the presenter is not in the room), beginning with the ways the plan seems likely to meet the goals, continuing with possible disconnects and problems, and perhaps ending with one or two probing questions for further reflection by the presenter.

Presenter Reaction (five minutes)

… The team leader talks about what he or she has learned from the consulting team’s feedback. This is not a time to defend oneself, but a time to explore further interesting ideas that came out of the feedback section. At any point, the presenter may open the conversation to the entire group (or not).

Next Steps and Debrief (five minutes)

… The consulting team discusses next steps for the initiative. … The facilitator leads an open discussion of this tuning experience.

Source: Adapted from McDonald & Allen, 2021.

Figure 2.1: Tuning protocol.

Visit go.SolutionTree.com/leadership for a free reproducible version of this figure.

Fashioning the proposal based on the conversations that took place in stage 1 and input provided on the “Initiative Vetting Notetaking Tool” (page 19), the leadership team leader designs his or her presentation to cover items outlined in the tuning protocol. The entire tuning protocol can be accomplished within an hour or more if needed. The team leader spends up to fifteen minutes delivering the presentation, while others listen without interruption. Then the consulting team has three minutes to ask clarifying questions. Clarifying questions tend to matters of fact that can usually be answered in a word or short explanation. A carefully chosen neutral facilitator from the consulting team is responsible for making sure that clarifying questions are really explanatory and that substantive issues are saved for later. Some examples of clarifying questions include the following. • “What was the main research base you referred to?” • “Did I understand you when you said . . . ? ” • “What criteria did you use to . . . ? ”